6 ms·

> Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace,

> Considering your Country decided not to give me the Nobel Peace Prize for having stopped 8 Wars PLUS, I no longer feel an obligation to think purely of Peace, although it will always be predominant, but can now think about what is good and proper' for the US No words

ndsipa_pomu 9mo ago
Two words: schoolyard bully It's just so ridiculous as "your Country" doesn't decide who gets the Nobel Peace Prize.
- AnimalMuppet 9mo ago
  Trump thinks every country runs by command from on top, just as he attempts to run America.
- vee-kay 9mo ago
  Which would be true if the Nobel Peace Prize wasn't given to Barack Obama (and never revoked despite the overwhelming evidence his actions led to more wars). Because he shamelessly went to Geneva to personally collect the Nobel Peace Prize AFTER he has signed off to start new wars from the beginning of his first tenure. In fact, Barack Obama is the only two-term US President who kept the nation officially involved throughout his tenures. It is evident.. Barack Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize not because he was the doyen of peace (no, he was the harbinger of wars), but because he was the first Black President in the history of the United States of America. And there are other examples where the genuineness and sincerity of the Nobel Committee can be questioned. Ironically, Donald Trump has directly or indirectly dismantled or paused more wars than Obama started (and continued). However, to think of him as a soothsayer of peace is foolhardiness. He is deep in the pockets of the wealthy elites, and does whatever's best for them and him. He doesn't deserve the Nobel Peace Prize either.
  - expedition32 9mo ago
    This is Obama Derangement Syndrome.
    - vee-kay 9mo ago
      A simple Google search of the wars started/involved by USA under the regime of Obama should tell you whether it is historical fact or a syndrome of your own coinage.
  - dundundundun 9mo ago
    The point is that Norway does not hand out the peace price - an independent committee does. And its Oslo, not Geneva.
    - AlotOfReading 9mo ago
      Not to mention that prizes can't be revoked.
      - vee-kay 9mo ago
        Yeah, I realise the Nobel prizes cannot be revoked. It was sarcasm. But let's hear it from the horse's mouth.. The secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Geir Lundestad, wrote in his memoir that the decision “did not achieve what the committee had hoped for”, and that “in hindsight the argument … was only partially correct.”
    - vee-kay 9mo ago
      My apologies. Yes, you are right, Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, not Geneva. However, you are incorrect on your first point. Nobel Peace Prize is decided by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, a group of five members appointed by the Norwegian Parliament (Storting). This is different from the other Nobel Prizes, which are decided by Swedish institutions and awarded in Stockholm.
      - dundundundun 9mo ago
        Still, the Norwegian parliament has no direct input on who is chosen for the peace price. (I am fully aware of the setup of the committee, hell, Norway is a small country so i've even met a couple of the members.) Obama was a stupid choice, you'll get no argument from me there.
  - cosmicgadget 9mo ago
    This is run of the mill copypasta about Obama's Nobel Prize and has zero relevance to whether or not Trump not getting the award is casus belli against a completely different country. However I am interested to hear your plan for Obama ending the wars that Cheney dumped on him.
    - vee-kay 9mo ago
      What is copy-pasta here? All these facts about Obama and his wars are known to the world. Or do Americans have wool on their eyes when it comes to their politicians' wrongdoings? It is my bad that I wrote Geneva instead of Oslo. But that typo/errata doesn't change the facts about Obama or Trump. How can you claim it to be zero relevance when the discussion is about incumbent US President not deserving the Nobel Peace Prize, when it is a fact that the US President he replaced earlier certainly didn't deserve either (for doing wars through 2 consecutive tenures)? Or are you accustomed to making excuses for the most powerful men in the world, using their privilege to get or expect Nobel Peace Prize like it is some cotton candy? Although, cotton candy might have more relevance than the Nobel Peace Prize, IMHO. Considering that some of the previous recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize are of dubious distinction: ** By your "Cheney did wars that Obama didn't stop" yardstick, Henry Kissinger should also be squarely blamed, though he himself got the Nobel Peace Prize. (Hmmm, what's up with such warmongers getting Nobel Peace Prize?!) Of course, Kissinger didn’t start the Vietnam war, but he played a major role in how it was conducted and ended. He helped design the policy of “Vietnamization” (gradual U.S. withdrawal while training South Vietnamese forces). He was involved in secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia and Laos, which are among the most controversial aspects of U.S. policy. ** Aung Sang Suu Kyu supported military genocides on some communities, though she spent most of her life in jail or house-arrest and was a crusader for democracy (unfortunately she appears to have died, as her son and others claim she's missing from last few years after her government was overthrown by a military junta coup and she was jailed). ** Mahatma Gandhi was a wife-beating paedophile, he was responsible for Partition of India and genocides on Hindus (due to his open support for Jinnah who unleashed those genocides), his actions caused millions of Indians to suffer for years under brutal British enslavement. But I see you are making excuses for the US Presidents not being able to stop wars their country started or involved in. So you think Bush Jr. and Obama were puppets of Dick Cheney? So is your vice president running your country, not the President? Then why have that seemingly irrelevant position of President at the White House? Is that your excuse now to ignore Trump's wrongdoings? (He won't get the Nobel Peace Prize, for sure, but he'll try to buy it or coerce it, he doesn't seem to care what the world thinks of him, because he knows Americans think highly of him, because they elected him twice (the second time he took oath for the highest office, was AFTER he was convicted of felony))! Even I am finding this all ridiculous to type out, it is even more frustrating that this is all real history, and (like it is wont to do) history seems to be repeating itself: The most powerful men in the world doing wars/invasions, while chasing after Nobel Peace Prize.
  - fifilura 9mo ago
    > because he was the first Black President in the history That seems to have hit a sore spot in you. A black man, who could have thought? Did you read the motivation? "Extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced the award on October 9, 2009, citing Obama's promotion of nuclear nonproliferation[2] and a "new climate" in international relations fostered by Obama, especially in reaching out to the Muslim world." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize As I recall it (somewhat vividly), the world took a sigh of relief after the tensions had been rising for many years between USA and the muslim world. After years of what GWB himself called "crusades" in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Obama took action to soothe the tension. That said. I do agree the prize was premature and a mistake in hindsight. (Obama himself was very surprised and humbled). But at the time, I too felt a big relief because people were actually talking to each other like human beings.
    - vee-kay 9mo ago
      My point is not just that Nobel Committe offered the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama, it is that: he went and accepted it in person, AFTER he had already certainly signed off on new wars (you can cross-check their timelines) almost immediately after he took oath as the new President. And he did sign off on new wars, during BOTH tenures. So Obama is a hypocrite, who shamelessly accepted Peace Prize after starting wars and conflicts. History tells us: * Obama inherited the Iraq War and Afghanistan war, started during Bush Jr. regime. But to his credit, Obama ended them. * However, Obama (USA) and NATO intervened in the Libya civil war and escalated it. * Obama did the full scale war in Syria (but one can argue it was to combat terrorism). * But under Obama regime, there was major increase in drone strikes in: Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia. These were highly controversial due to civilian casualties. In a nutshell, Obama ended one war, he didn't initiate traditional large-scale wars, but he certainly expanded air, drone, and proxy conflicts. That's why I said Obama is the only 2-term US President who kept his country at war during both tenures. Now that is a dubious honor for any politician, whether he be black or white or any color in between. Now Trump Sr. is following the bloodsoaked footsteps of Bush Jr. and Obama (in terms of warfare, I mean). Trump has invaded and seized Venezuela, and he's threatening to do the same to Greenland. And he won't stop there. But bullies never do. FYI, I am brown. But irrespective of skin color, I do not condone a warmonger getting or coveting a peace prize (a highly prestigious and huge amount involved at that: $1+ million dollars prize money). Perhaps Americans and their NATO allies do not see such perspective, maybe because they think that blind patriotism and war-for-oils are greater than pragmatism and world peace. Or maybe they think their country being a warmonger bully is justified, to "soothe the tensions". In the annals of history, Obama and Trump will both be judged, on the same pedestal of warfare. And it won't paint them in a good picture.
  - rsynnott 9mo ago
    Obama got the Peace Prize for not being George W Bush (or, more to the point, not being under the thumb of the likes of Cheney and Rumsfeld). Towards the end, Cheney was pushing Bush to _invade Iran_. Now "you are sane, and not under the control of anyone insane" is, granted, a fairly weak justification for a Nobel prize, but given the anxiety at the time...

ndsipa_pomu 9mo ago

Two words: schoolyard bully It's just so ridiculous as "your Country" doesn't decide who gets the Nobel Peace Prize.

AnimalMuppet 9mo ago
Trump thinks every country runs by command from on top, just as he attempts to run America.
vee-kay 9mo ago
Which would be true if the Nobel Peace Prize wasn't given to Barack Obama (and never revoked despite the overwhelming evidence his actions led to more wars). Because he shamelessly went to Geneva to personally collect the Nobel Peace Prize AFTER he has signed off to start new wars from the beginning of his first tenure. In fact, Barack Obama is the only two-term US President who kept the nation officially involved throughout his tenures. It is evident.. Barack Obama got the Nobel Peace Prize not because he was the doyen of peace (no, he was the harbinger of wars), but because he was the first Black President in the history of the United States of America. And there are other examples where the genuineness and sincerity of the Nobel Committee can be questioned. Ironically, Donald Trump has directly or indirectly dismantled or paused more wars than Obama started (and continued). However, to think of him as a soothsayer of peace is foolhardiness. He is deep in the pockets of the wealthy elites, and does whatever's best for them and him. He doesn't deserve the Nobel Peace Prize either.
- expedition32 9mo ago
  This is Obama Derangement Syndrome.
  - vee-kay 9mo ago
    A simple Google search of the wars started/involved by USA under the regime of Obama should tell you whether it is historical fact or a syndrome of your own coinage.
- dundundundun 9mo ago
  The point is that Norway does not hand out the peace price - an independent committee does. And its Oslo, not Geneva.
  - AlotOfReading 9mo ago
    Not to mention that prizes can't be revoked.
    - vee-kay 9mo ago
      Yeah, I realise the Nobel prizes cannot be revoked. It was sarcasm. But let's hear it from the horse's mouth.. The secretary of the Norwegian Nobel Committee, Geir Lundestad, wrote in his memoir that the decision “did not achieve what the committee had hoped for”, and that “in hindsight the argument … was only partially correct.”
  - vee-kay 9mo ago
    My apologies. Yes, you are right, Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, not Geneva. However, you are incorrect on your first point. Nobel Peace Prize is decided by the Norwegian Nobel Committee, a group of five members appointed by the Norwegian Parliament (Storting). This is different from the other Nobel Prizes, which are decided by Swedish institutions and awarded in Stockholm.
    - dundundundun 9mo ago
      Still, the Norwegian parliament has no direct input on who is chosen for the peace price. (I am fully aware of the setup of the committee, hell, Norway is a small country so i've even met a couple of the members.) Obama was a stupid choice, you'll get no argument from me there.
- cosmicgadget 9mo ago
  This is run of the mill copypasta about Obama's Nobel Prize and has zero relevance to whether or not Trump not getting the award is casus belli against a completely different country. However I am interested to hear your plan for Obama ending the wars that Cheney dumped on him.
  - vee-kay 9mo ago
    What is copy-pasta here? All these facts about Obama and his wars are known to the world. Or do Americans have wool on their eyes when it comes to their politicians' wrongdoings? It is my bad that I wrote Geneva instead of Oslo. But that typo/errata doesn't change the facts about Obama or Trump. How can you claim it to be zero relevance when the discussion is about incumbent US President not deserving the Nobel Peace Prize, when it is a fact that the US President he replaced earlier certainly didn't deserve either (for doing wars through 2 consecutive tenures)? Or are you accustomed to making excuses for the most powerful men in the world, using their privilege to get or expect Nobel Peace Prize like it is some cotton candy? Although, cotton candy might have more relevance than the Nobel Peace Prize, IMHO. Considering that some of the previous recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize are of dubious distinction: ** By your "Cheney did wars that Obama didn't stop" yardstick, Henry Kissinger should also be squarely blamed, though he himself got the Nobel Peace Prize. (Hmmm, what's up with such warmongers getting Nobel Peace Prize?!) Of course, Kissinger didn’t start the Vietnam war, but he played a major role in how it was conducted and ended. He helped design the policy of “Vietnamization” (gradual U.S. withdrawal while training South Vietnamese forces). He was involved in secret bombing campaigns in Cambodia and Laos, which are among the most controversial aspects of U.S. policy. ** Aung Sang Suu Kyu supported military genocides on some communities, though she spent most of her life in jail or house-arrest and was a crusader for democracy (unfortunately she appears to have died, as her son and others claim she's missing from last few years after her government was overthrown by a military junta coup and she was jailed). ** Mahatma Gandhi was a wife-beating paedophile, he was responsible for Partition of India and genocides on Hindus (due to his open support for Jinnah who unleashed those genocides), his actions caused millions of Indians to suffer for years under brutal British enslavement. But I see you are making excuses for the US Presidents not being able to stop wars their country started or involved in. So you think Bush Jr. and Obama were puppets of Dick Cheney? So is your vice president running your country, not the President? Then why have that seemingly irrelevant position of President at the White House? Is that your excuse now to ignore Trump's wrongdoings? (He won't get the Nobel Peace Prize, for sure, but he'll try to buy it or coerce it, he doesn't seem to care what the world thinks of him, because he knows Americans think highly of him, because they elected him twice (the second time he took oath for the highest office, was AFTER he was convicted of felony))! Even I am finding this all ridiculous to type out, it is even more frustrating that this is all real history, and (like it is wont to do) history seems to be repeating itself: The most powerful men in the world doing wars/invasions, while chasing after Nobel Peace Prize.
- fifilura 9mo ago
  > because he was the first Black President in the history That seems to have hit a sore spot in you. A black man, who could have thought? Did you read the motivation? "Extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples. The Norwegian Nobel Committee announced the award on October 9, 2009, citing Obama's promotion of nuclear nonproliferation[2] and a "new climate" in international relations fostered by Obama, especially in reaching out to the Muslim world." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Nobel_Peace_Prize As I recall it (somewhat vividly), the world took a sigh of relief after the tensions had been rising for many years between USA and the muslim world. After years of what GWB himself called "crusades" in Iraq and Afghanistan. And Obama took action to soothe the tension. That said. I do agree the prize was premature and a mistake in hindsight. (Obama himself was very surprised and humbled). But at the time, I too felt a big relief because people were actually talking to each other like human beings.
  - vee-kay 9mo ago
    My point is not just that Nobel Committe offered the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama, it is that: he went and accepted it in person, AFTER he had already certainly signed off on new wars (you can cross-check their timelines) almost immediately after he took oath as the new President. And he did sign off on new wars, during BOTH tenures. So Obama is a hypocrite, who shamelessly accepted Peace Prize after starting wars and conflicts. History tells us: * Obama inherited the Iraq War and Afghanistan war, started during Bush Jr. regime. But to his credit, Obama ended them. * However, Obama (USA) and NATO intervened in the Libya civil war and escalated it. * Obama did the full scale war in Syria (but one can argue it was to combat terrorism). * But under Obama regime, there was major increase in drone strikes in: Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia. These were highly controversial due to civilian casualties. In a nutshell, Obama ended one war, he didn't initiate traditional large-scale wars, but he certainly expanded air, drone, and proxy conflicts. That's why I said Obama is the only 2-term US President who kept his country at war during both tenures. Now that is a dubious honor for any politician, whether he be black or white or any color in between. Now Trump Sr. is following the bloodsoaked footsteps of Bush Jr. and Obama (in terms of warfare, I mean). Trump has invaded and seized Venezuela, and he's threatening to do the same to Greenland. And he won't stop there. But bullies never do. FYI, I am brown. But irrespective of skin color, I do not condone a warmonger getting or coveting a peace prize (a highly prestigious and huge amount involved at that: $1+ million dollars prize money). Perhaps Americans and their NATO allies do not see such perspective, maybe because they think that blind patriotism and war-for-oils are greater than pragmatism and world peace. Or maybe they think their country being a warmonger bully is justified, to "soothe the tensions". In the annals of history, Obama and Trump will both be judged, on the same pedestal of warfare. And it won't paint them in a good picture.
- rsynnott 9mo ago
  Obama got the Peace Prize for not being George W Bush (or, more to the point, not being under the thumb of the likes of Cheney and Rumsfeld). Towards the end, Cheney was pushing Bush to _invade Iran_. Now "you are sane, and not under the control of anyone insane" is, granted, a fairly weak justification for a Nobel prize, but given the anxiety at the time...